4 ms·

The main reason our insurance cost so much is because there are so many claims. This is partially because our licensing is too lax, there is too much vandalism

The main reason our insurance cost so much is because there are so many claims. This is partially because our licensing is too lax, there is too much vandalism and storm loss, and the costs of the vehicles and health are is so high. Higher quality drivers will result in fewer claims and cheaper premiums.

whimsicalism 3y ago
Drivers are getting worse and insurance companies are often mandated to cover all “good drivers” for some state-defined definition of good. So I am basically subsidizing alcoholics and stuff because they can’t price that into the premium in California.
- giantg2 3y ago
  I knew a kid with ADHD in high school. There were days (game days) when he would intentionally not take his medicine, yet he would still drive. He had numerous accidents. One time he stopped behind someone at a stop sign. Then he rear-ended them because he forgot they were in front of him and he got caught up in looking for a gap to pull out. He totaled 3 cars before the end of high school.
y-c-o-m-b 3y ago
Our driver tests are a joke. Driver quality seems to be decreasing significantly in my area. To make things worse, there is a massive shortage in driving instructors for new drivers. Prior to December, I had only see 1 wrong-way driver in my entire 20+ years of driving. Since December, I have seen 4! One of them was on the freeway going up-hill and slightly around a bend - at night - which was extremely frightening to witness as people were dodging it at the last second due to poor visibility.
- giantg2 3y ago
  I've seen this happening more now. I have two potential explainations. First, almost all of the people I've heard of doing this have turned out to be really drunk or high when they were arrested or autopsied. Second, one is more along the lines of what you're saying with poor driver quality. Some people have an over-reliance on GPS telling them where to turn and have lost the ability to navigate for themselves (or even just verify what the machine is telling them is at least safe).
  - BeFlatXIII 3y ago
    > Some people have an over-reliance on GPS telling them where to turn and have lost the ability to navigate for themselves (or even just verify what the machine is telling them is at least safe). Perhaps we ought to start attaching jail time to people who drive the wrong way due to reliance on incorrect GPS as a soft form of eugenics. Keep them in a position where they aren't in a position to find love and reproduce for a year.
    - giantg2 3y ago
      Most of it is not a genetic issue. Many of the people who rely on GPS so heavily have the capability to navigate without it, but ate too lazy and inexperienced to do so.
- vacuity 3y ago
  To be clear, there was a yellow line separating the lanes and they were in the wrong lane?
  - giantg2 3y ago
    The examples I know of are usually on divided highways - they're on the wrong side of the barrier.
- Plasmoid 3y ago
  I have joked that I could train an above average dog to pass the California driving test.
CuriousCosmic 3y ago
If we had a comprehensive public transit network, then only the people who need to drive would do so. Then you could raise the licensing requirements. More importantly however you probably want to separate out roads from streets in American towns, cities, and suburbs to reduce the number of accident prone interactions. As it is now, streets and roads are treated basically the same way and you get the abomination that are "stroads". By keeping them separate you remove all pedestrian and bike traffic from roads and you massively slow down car traffic on streets (along with removing traffic lights on streets).
- giantg2 3y ago
  "If we had a comprehensive public transit network, then only the people who need to drive would do so. Then you could raise the licensing requirements." That's not a prerequisite for raising licensing requirements. In fact, claims tend to be highest in major cities that do have public transportation networks. So the people most likely to lose their license are more likely to have access to public transit. Pedestrian and bike deaths are an extremely small percentage of road fatalities and injuries. If you want to make an impact on insurance cost through reduced claims, you need to take another action. Higher quality drivers through more stringent education and testing is the most comprehensive way to do that with the lowest infrastructure cost. Note that not everyone would lose thier license. Many of the people involved in accidents today are ignorant and could be brought up to a possible level with better training.
  - CuriousCosmic 3y ago
    That's not the issue. The issue is that in the regions where you do have good public transit, most of the drivers are commuting from places that don't. So until those areas have at least decent access to public transit, you risk excluding people from those areas from economic opportunities in the city. So you still need a comprehensive public transit system. It doesn't need to be super regular or blazing fast but it needs to be viable enough that commuters can still commute if they can't get a license.
    - 3y ago

whimsicalism 3y ago

Drivers are getting worse and insurance companies are often mandated to cover all “good drivers” for some state-defined definition of good. So I am basically subsidizing alcoholics and stuff because they can’t price that into the premium in California.

giantg2 3y ago
I knew a kid with ADHD in high school. There were days (game days) when he would intentionally not take his medicine, yet he would still drive. He had numerous accidents. One time he stopped behind someone at a stop sign. Then he rear-ended them because he forgot they were in front of him and he got caught up in looking for a gap to pull out. He totaled 3 cars before the end of high school.

y-c-o-m-b 3y ago

Our driver tests are a joke. Driver quality seems to be decreasing significantly in my area. To make things worse, there is a massive shortage in driving instructors for new drivers. Prior to December, I had only see 1 wrong-way driver in my entire 20+ years of driving. Since December, I have seen 4! One of them was on the freeway going up-hill and slightly around a bend - at night - which was extremely frightening to witness as people were dodging it at the last second due to poor visibility.

giantg2 3y ago
I've seen this happening more now. I have two potential explainations. First, almost all of the people I've heard of doing this have turned out to be really drunk or high when they were arrested or autopsied. Second, one is more along the lines of what you're saying with poor driver quality. Some people have an over-reliance on GPS telling them where to turn and have lost the ability to navigate for themselves (or even just verify what the machine is telling them is at least safe).
- BeFlatXIII 3y ago
  > Some people have an over-reliance on GPS telling them where to turn and have lost the ability to navigate for themselves (or even just verify what the machine is telling them is at least safe). Perhaps we ought to start attaching jail time to people who drive the wrong way due to reliance on incorrect GPS as a soft form of eugenics. Keep them in a position where they aren't in a position to find love and reproduce for a year.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    Most of it is not a genetic issue. Many of the people who rely on GPS so heavily have the capability to navigate without it, but ate too lazy and inexperienced to do so.
vacuity 3y ago
To be clear, there was a yellow line separating the lanes and they were in the wrong lane?
- giantg2 3y ago
  The examples I know of are usually on divided highways - they're on the wrong side of the barrier.
Plasmoid 3y ago
I have joked that I could train an above average dog to pass the California driving test.

CuriousCosmic 3y ago

If we had a comprehensive public transit network, then only the people who need to drive would do so. Then you could raise the licensing requirements. More importantly however you probably want to separate out roads from streets in American towns, cities, and suburbs to reduce the number of accident prone interactions. As it is now, streets and roads are treated basically the same way and you get the abomination that are "stroads". By keeping them separate you remove all pedestrian and bike traffic from roads and you massively slow down car traffic on streets (along with removing traffic lights on streets).

giantg2 3y ago
"If we had a comprehensive public transit network, then only the people who need to drive would do so. Then you could raise the licensing requirements." That's not a prerequisite for raising licensing requirements. In fact, claims tend to be highest in major cities that do have public transportation networks. So the people most likely to lose their license are more likely to have access to public transit. Pedestrian and bike deaths are an extremely small percentage of road fatalities and injuries. If you want to make an impact on insurance cost through reduced claims, you need to take another action. Higher quality drivers through more stringent education and testing is the most comprehensive way to do that with the lowest infrastructure cost. Note that not everyone would lose thier license. Many of the people involved in accidents today are ignorant and could be brought up to a possible level with better training.
- CuriousCosmic 3y ago
  That's not the issue. The issue is that in the regions where you do have good public transit, most of the drivers are commuting from places that don't. So until those areas have at least decent access to public transit, you risk excluding people from those areas from economic opportunities in the city. So you still need a comprehensive public transit system. It doesn't need to be super regular or blazing fast but it needs to be viable enough that commuters can still commute if they can't get a license.
  - 3y ago